The J. R. Watkins Company v. Waldo
Decision Date | 06 December 1924 |
Docket Number | 25,470 |
Citation | 230 P. 1051,117 Kan. 250 |
Parties | THE J. R. WATKINS COMPANY, Appellant, v. M. D. WALDO et al., Appellees |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided July, 1924
Appeal from McPherson district court; WILLIAM G. FAIRCHILD, judge.
Judgment reversed.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.
1. CONTRACT--Relation of Seller and Buyer Created. A contract examined and held to create the relation of seller and buyer and not that of principal and agent.
2. SAME--Written Contract--Not Varied by Parol Testimony. The obvious meaning of a written contract cannot be varied by the parol testimony of one of the parties.
3. SAME--Finding of Trial Court Not Based Upon Substantial Evidence--Will Not Support a Judgment. A finding of a trial court, which is not based upon any substantial evidence, is insufficient to support a judgment.
James A. Cassler, of McPherson, M. B. Webber, J. M. George and M. J. Owen, all of Winona, Minn., for the appellant.
P. J. Galle, James L. Galle, and Frank O. Johnson, all of McPherson, for appellees.
This is an action by a foreign corporation for a balance claimed to be due it from citizens of this state for the sale of merchandise under a contract. The defendants appeared specially, objected to the jurisdiction of the court, and moved to set aside the summons served upon them for the reason that plaintiff is a foreign corporation, doing business in this state within the meaning of R. S. 17-506, and had never made application for, nor received authority from, the charter board to do business in this state. The court sustained this motion, and the plaintiff has appealed.
The contract between the parties, upon which the action was based, and in accordance with which their business was conducted, is as follows:
In the state of Kansas, in McPherson county, except the north tier of townships, the townships of Battle Hill, Delmore and New Gottland, in the second tier from the north and the north half of the townships of McPherson, Empire and Canton, in the third tier from the north, and in consideration thereof the party of the second part promises and agrees as soon as practicable after said goods and other articles are received, to make a thorough and personal canvass of said territory at least four times a year, at his own cost and expense, and to provide a proper outfit therefore, and to sell said goods or so much thereof as possible, and at all times during said term said party of the second part agrees to keep a complete record of all goods disposed of by him, and on hand, to make to said company complete regular weekly written reports of the sale and collections, which reports, however, or any of them, may be waived by said company, and also to report the goods on hand and outstanding accounts when requested by said company so to do.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Curtis Publishing Company v. Cassel, 6876.
...S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95. 13 Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 278. 14 The reliance of Curtis on J. R. Watkins Co. v. Waldo, 117 Kan. 250, 230 P. 1051, is misplaced. That case involved the sale and delivery of goods outside of the state to a dealer who in turn sold ......
-
Amoco Production Co. v. Armold
...is, that a finding which is not based on substantial competent evidence is not sufficient to support a judgment. (J. R. Watkins Co. v. Waldo, 117 Kan. 250, 255, 230 P. 1051; Potts v. McDonald, 146 Kan. 366, 369, 69 P.2d Since, in my opinion, the judgment of the court below lacks substantial......
-
Geerdes v. J. R. Watkins Co.
...913; J. R. Watkins Co. v. Brund, 160 Wash. 183, 294 P. 1024; Sinnett v. J. R. Watkins Co., 214 Ky. 76, 282 S.W. 769; J. R. Watkins Co. v. Waldo, 117 Kan. 250, 230 P. 1051; J. R. Watkins Co. v. Salyers, 384 Ill. 369, 51 N.E.2d 574; Wright v. J. R. Watkins Co., 86 Ind.App. 695, 159 N.E. 761; ......
-
W.T. Rawleigh Co. v. Harper
... ... A. Reynolds, Judge ... Action ... by the W. T. Rawleigh Company against Edwin Harper and ... others. From a judgment of dismissal, plaintiff appeals ... his parol testimony. Watkins Co. v. Waldo, ... [173 Wash. 239] 117 Kan. 250, 230 P ... 1051. In that case the court ... ...